BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, DELHI (OA No. 347/2016) INTERIM REPORT … ·...

BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, DELHI

(OA No. 347/2016)

INTERIM REPORT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 18/03/2020

I J.Justin Mohan, S/O R B Jeevaji aged 47 years and employed as the Secretary,

National Biodiversity Authority, a statutory body functioning under the Ministry of

Environment, Forest and Climate Change headquartered in Chennai, do hereby

solemnly affirm and state as follows:-

1. I am conversant with the facts of the case and I have been authorized to file this

interim report on behalf of the second respondent.

2. In pursuance to the Order of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Delhi, the National

Biodiversity Authority has informed the Chief Secretaries of all States about the Orders

of this Tribunal for taking necessary actions to complete the BMC formation and PBR

preparation. A true copy of the letters addressed to the Chief Secretaries is enclosed as

Exhibit I. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown announced by

Government, there is no significant progress in the formation of BMCs and preparation

of PBRs since February 2020.

3. State Biodiversity Board, Uttarakhand and State Biodiversity Board, Goa have

informed that they have completed the BMC formation and PBR preparation in all their

local bodies by 31/01/2020 as directed by this Tribunal and conveyed the same to

National Biodiversity Authority during the first week of February 2020. This has been

subsequently ascertained and found correct. Accordingly, Uttarakhand has completed

the formation of BMCs in all the 7991 local bodies and prepared the PBRs for all the

7991 BMCs. Similarly, Goa has completed the formation of BMCs in all the 205 local

bodies and prepared the PBRs for all the 205 BMCs. Therefore Uttarakhand and Goa

have completed the process of BMC formation and PBR preparation within the deadline

stipulated by the Tribunal and therefore the Hon'ble Tribunal may please exempt these

two States from imposing the monetary penalty from 01/02/2020.

4. State Biodiversity Board, Kerala has informed that as per the Kerala State Biological

Diversity Rules, 2008 framed as per the provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002,

they have completed the formation of BMC at the Grama Panchayat, Municipality and

Corporation levels. According to the SBB, Kerala, the biodiversity wealth of the State

has been captured by the PBR preparation at these three levels and preparing PBR at

Block and District levels would only amount to duplication of work andincurring of

additional cost. They have therefore requested to remove the State from the list of

defaulting States. As SBB, Kerala has completed the work in accordance with the

Kerala State Biodiversity Rules, NBA is of the view that they maybe exempted from

imposing the monetary penalty from 01/02/2020.

5. Based on the figures provided by the SBB, Uttar Pradesh, NBA had in its Final

Report, informed the Hon'ble Tribunal that BMCs were constituted in 59,407 local

bodies and 59,407 PBRs have been completed in all BMCs. The members of the

MoEFCC-NBA PBR Monitoring Committee had undertaken visits to different States in

February 2020, to evaluate the quality of PBRs prepared by BMCs. During the visit, it

was found that the PBRs were prepared on a fast track basis by Uttar Pradesh. This

was also discussed during the MOEF-NBA PBR Monitoring Committee held in

Thiruvananthapuram on 5th and 6th March 2020. As the PBRs prepared by Uttar

Pradesh were not in line with the guidelines circulated by NBA, Uttar Pradesh

Government has been requested to prepare the PBRs as per the existing guidelines. A

copy of the first quarterly report of the PBR Monitoring Committee submitted to

MoEF&CC is enclosed as Exhibit-II.

6. The Hon'ble Tribunal in its Order had instructed the National Biodiversity Authority to

revise the present model for PBR preparation, and place the same in the website of the

NBA after considering other PBR models including the one prepared by Nagaland. The

existing PBR Guidelines, 2013 were finalized after an elaborate consultation with the

SBBs by a Committee constituted for this purpose and are quite exhaustive and have

been followed by the States. Considering the diverse climatic, terrain and soil

conditions along with diverse biodiversity values in India, it is practically difficult to

impose one particular format. The existing PBR guidelines have provided the required

flexibility to the States to adhere to one or more of the 31 formats for data collection and

collation in the guidelines depending on the nature of the biological resources available

in the local body. This has been prominently placed in the NBA website and has been

circulated to all the SBBs. Accordingly, local bodies in rural areas with agrarian features

can focus on the formats specified to include agricultural biodiversity, those adjoining or

inside forested areas can focus on forest biodiversity, those near coastal areas and

inland water bodies can focus on aquatic biodiversity, those in urban areas can focus on

urban biodiversity etc.

7. However, considering the suggestions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in respect of reviewing

the guidelines for preparing of quality PBRs, NBA is examining the scope of utilizing

Information Technology to further improve the quality of PBRs. This requires an

elaborate consultation with the SBBs and the Government agencies involved in

Information Technology like the NIC, CDAC and scientific institutions like Zoological

Survey of India, Botanical Survey of India etc on the feasibility of switching over to a

new electronic format. Once this format is finalized, the SBBs would be informed about

the same and this model would be placed in the website of NBA for preparing the PBRs

Till this occurs, it would be prudent to continue with the existing guidelines of preparing

PBRs in a physical format.

All facts stated above are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.

Dated this the 18th day of April, 2020

(Deponent)

DO NO. NBA/5/30/219/SBB/NGT Dated: 30/03/2020

Dear Ms. Nilam Sawhney,

Sub: Implementation of the Orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Delhi with respect to the formation of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) and preparation of People's Biodiversity Registers (PBRs) - Request to utilize funds under CAMPA and constitute a State level PBR Monitoring Committee - regarding

Ref: OA No. 347/2016 filed by Shri. Chandra Bhal Singh before the Principal Bench of Hon NGT

Please refer to this office letter even no. dated 8th November 2019 (copy enclosed as Annexure I), by which the State Government was requested to take proactive steps to complete the formation of Biodiversity Management Committees and preparation of Peoples Biodiversity Registers for all the local bodies of the State as directed by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal before 31/01/2020. The status of BMCs formed and PBRs prepared in your State is as follows:-

Timeline Total no. of local bodies (Target no)

BMCs formed PBRs prepared

As on 31/07/2019 13848 7011 100 As on 31/01/2020 7231 310

As is evident from the above, though substantial progress has been made in respect of BMC constitution, more efforts are needed for preparation of PBRs and the task has not been completed as per the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT. The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.

While the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and National Biodiversity Authority have been providing the required technical support for achieving the above task, the State Government is requested to provide the required infrastructure and financial support for accomplishing the target and accordingly instruct the Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj under whom the local bodies function to complete the process at the earliest.

Once the above task has been accomplished, you are requested to inform the status, so that action can be taken to inform the Hon'ble NGT and the CPCB to stop recovering the penalty from your State from the date of completion.

Preparation of good quality PBRs is very critical for the conservation of our biological resources. The amount that would accrue for BMCs as part of Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) would greatly depend on the biological resources indicated by the PBRs. Therefore it is very important to prepare a good quality PBR as per the format recommended by NBA. This exercise may require between Rs 5-7 lakhs per PBR depending on the extent of area under the jurisdiction of the local body and the biological diversity values therein.

1/2

In this regard, State Governments may consider spending part of the budget allocated for the Panchayati Raj Department for strengthening the BMCs and preparation of PBRs. State Governments may also consider utilizing the Compensatory Afforestation (CAMPA) Fund, in accordance with section 5(3) of the CAF Rules, 2018 for this purpose and accordingly prepare the Annual Plan of Operations for utilization of STATE CAMPA Funds.

In order to evaluate the quality of PBRs prepared by the States, NBA with the approval of the Government of India has constituted two Committees as directed by the Hon'ble NGT, which are currently in the process of evaluating the quality of PBRs on a sample basis. Copy of the OM constituting the Committee is enclosed as Annexure III. But considering the large number of PBRs to be evaluated, it would be practically difficult for this Committee to conduct an extensive evaluation of the quality of the PBRs prepared. Therefore, State Government is advised to constitute a 5-7 members State-level PBR Quality Evaluation Monitoring Committee, comprising of subject matter experts including superannuated forest service officers which could oversee the quality of PBRs by evolving a suitable mechanism and also to support the National PBR Monitoring Committee appropriately. The NBA has developed a PBR Quality Evaluation Framework (Annexure IV), which is to be used to be used by the State-level PBR Quality Evaluation Monitoring Committee.

In the light of the recent NGT Order, you are requested to review the action taken till date with the concerned officials and finalize a road map for accomplishing the task of completing the formation of BMCs and preparation of good quality PBRs and inform this office.

In order to constantly monitor the progress in the matter, we have planned to organize interactions with the State Biodiversity Boards / UT Biodiversity Councils through video-conferencing organized with technical assistance from NIC, Chennai (dates and time given below) and you may please advise your officers to participate.

S.No. Date Time 1 28/04/2020 14.30 - 1700 hrs 2 29/05/2020 14.30 - 1700 hrs 3 29/06/2020 14.30 - 1700 hrs 4 30/07/2020 14.30 - 1700 hrs 5 31/08/2020 14.30 - 1700 hrs 6 21/09/2020 11.00 - 1330 hrs

Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Ms. Nilam Sawhney,IAS Chief Secretary Government of Andhra Pradesh


Dear Shri Naresh Kumar, IAS



Please refer to this office letter even no. dated 8th November 2019 (copy enclosed as Annexure I), by which the State Government was requested to take proactive steps to complete the formation of Biodiversity Management Committees and preparation of Peoples Biodiversity Registers for all the local bodies of the State as directed by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal before 31/01/2020.

The status of BMCs formed and PBRs prepared in your State is as follows:-



As on 31/07/2019 1806 144 49 As on 31/01/2020 1537 80 As is evident from the above, though substantial progress has been made in respect of BMC constitution, more efforts are needed for preparation of PBRs and the task has not been completed as per the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT. The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Naresh Kumar, IAS Chief Secretary Govt of Arunachal Pradesh


Dear Shri Kumar Sanjay Krishna,






As on 31/07/2019 2549 229 121 As on 31/01/2020 2549 2489 As is evident from the above, though substantial progress has been made in respect of BMC constitution, more efforts are needed for preparation of PBRs and the task has not been completed as per the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT. The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Kumar Sanjay Krishna, IAS Chief Secretary Govt of Assam


Dear Shri Deepak Kumar,






As on 31/07/2019 9100 0 0 As on 31/01/2020 5837 0


While the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and National Biodiversity Authority have been providing the required technical support for achieving the above task, the State Government is requested to provide the required infrastructure and financial support for accomplishing the target and accordingly instruct the Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj under whom the local bodies function to complete the process at the earliest. Once the above task has been accomplished, you are requested to inform the status, so that action can be taken to inform the Hon'ble NGT and the CPCB to stop recovering the penalty from your State from the date of completion.


1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Deepak Kumar, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Bihar


Dear Shri Lalnunmawia Chuaungo,






As on 31/07/2019 907 501 5 As on 31/01/2020 855 5




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Lalnunmawia Chuaungo, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Mizoram.


Dear Shri Parimal Rai,






As on 31/07/2019 205 194 0 As on 31/01/2020 205 198

As is evident from the above, though significant progress has been made in respect of BMC constitution, the task has not been fully completed as per the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT.The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.



1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Parimal Rai, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Goa.


Dear Shri M.S. Rao,






As on 31/07/2019 6471 294 45 As on 31/01/2020 3274 78




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri M.S. Rao, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Meghalaya.


Dear Dr. J Suresh Babu,






As on 31/07/2019 2282 911 35 As on 31/01/2020 1344 37




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Dr. J Suresh Babu, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Manipur.


Dear Shri Ajoy G. Mehta,






As on 31/07/2019 28654 24531 18 As on 31/01/2020 28654 14833




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Ajoy G. Mehta, IAS Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra.


Dear Shri Iqbal Singh Bains,






As on 31/07/2019 23617 23438 890 As on 31/01/2020 19352 938




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Iqbal Singh Bains, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Madhya Pradesh


Dear Shri Tom Jose,






As on 31/07/2019 1200 1034 974 As on 31/01/2020 1200 1034




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Tom Jose, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Kerala.


Dear Shri TM Vijay Bhaskar,






As on 31/07/2019 6506 5599 1987 As on 31/01/2020 6500 2093




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri TM Vijay Bhaskar, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Karnataka.


Dear Dr. Devendra Kumar Tiwari,






As on 31/07/2019 4689 4050 107 As on 31/01/2020 4411 632




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Dr. Devendra Kumar Tiwari, IAS Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand.


Dear Shri Anil Khachi,






As on 31/07/2019 3370 730 6 As on 31/01/2020 3370 110




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Anil Khachi, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Himachal Pradesh.


Dear Ms. Keshni Anand Arora,






As on 31/07/2019 6438 5867 0 As on 31/01/2020 6394 126




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Ms. Keshni Anand Arora, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Haryana.


Dear Shri Anil Mukim,






As on 31/07/2019 14444 7596 1164 As on 31/01/2020 9383 1382




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Anil Mukim, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Gujarat.


Dear Shri Talitemjen Toy,






As on 31/07/2019 1281 630 18 As on 31/01/2020 953 18




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Talitemjen Toy, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Nagaland.


Dear Dr. Asit Tripathy,






As on 31/07/2019 7256 2502 11 As on 31/01/2020 6706 111




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Dr. Asit Tripathy, IAS Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha.


Dear Shri Talitemjen Toy,






As on 31/07/2019 1281 630 18 As on 31/01/2020 953 18




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Talitemjen Toy, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Nagaland.


Dear Shri Devendra Bhushan Gupta,






As on 31/07/2019 10406 119 0 As on 31/01/2020 10283 0




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Devendra Bhushan Gupta, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Rajasthan.


Dear Shri S.C. Gupta,






As on 31/07/2019 196 43 15 As on 31/01/2020 196 30




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri S.C. Gupta, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Sikkim.


Dear Shri K. Shanmugam,






As on 31/07/2019 13610 1049 0 As on 31/01/2020 13604 1049




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri K. Shanmugam, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu.


Dear Shri Somesh Kumar,






As on 31/07/2019 13454 3219 213 As on 31/01/2020 13319 213




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Somesh Kumar, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Telangana.


Dear Shri Manoj Kumar,






As on 31/07/2019 1264 1118 469 As on 31/01/2020 1264 482




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Manoj Kumar, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Tripura.


Dear Dr. Karan Avtar Singh,






As on 31/07/2019 13591 74 43 As on 31/01/2020 13409 1495




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Dr. Karan Avtar Singh, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Punjab.


Dear Shri Utpal Kumar Singh,






As on 31/07/2019 7991 5463 59 As on 31/01/2020 7459 7317

As is evident from the above, though significant progress has been made in respect of BMC constitution, the task has not been fully completed as per the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT. The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.



1/2






Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Utpal Kumar Singh, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Uttarakhand


Dear Shri Rajiva Sinha,






As on 31/07/2019 3833 448 175 As on 31/01/2020 3514 713




1/2






Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Rajiva Sinha, IAS Chief Secretary Government of West Bengal


Dear Shri Rajendra Kumar Tiwari,





BMCs formed (as reported by SBB)

PBRs prepared (as reported by SBB)

As on 31/07/2019 60304 58782 325 As on 31/01/2020 59407 59407

Though the State Biodiversity Board had reported that all the BMCs have been formed and the PBRs have been prepared which was also reported to the Hon'ble NGT, later it was found that the PBRs were not in consonance with the format prescribed by NBA. The PBRs have been prepared on a fast track basis and has not captured all the biological resources and associated knowledge in the Register as per the established procedures. Therefore the task of preparing the PBRs has not been fully completed in your state. The Hon'ble NGT vide Order dated 18/03/2020 has instructed all the defaulting states have to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs per month starting from 01/02/2020 to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) till such time, the task is fully completed. Copy of the Order of the Hon'ble NGT is enclosed as Annexure II.








Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

(Dr. V. B. Mathur)

Chairperson To Shri Rajendra Kumar Tiwari, IAS Chief Secretary Government of Uttar Pradesh.

1/2

FIRST REPORT OF THE

PBR MONITORING COMMITTEE

SUBMITTED TO

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST & CLIMATE CHANGE

THROUGH

NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY AUTHORITY

BY

PBR Monitoring Committee - I PBR Monitoring Committee - II Chairman Chairman 1. Dr. S.K.Khanduri 1. Dr. R.B.S.Rawat Members Members 2. Dr. Oommen V Oommen 2. Shri. R.R.Shukla 3. Dr. Joseph Bagyaraj 3. Dr. A.K.Gupta 4. Dr. D.Narasimhan 4. Shri. Arakkal Ashraf 5. Dr. Ramakrishnan 5. Dr. Neelima Jerath 6. V.G.Malathi 6. Dr. M.Sanjappa 7. Dr. P.K.Singh Convener Convener 7. J.Justin Mohan 8. J.Justin Mohan

INTRODUCTION

In pursuance of the Order passed by the Principal Bench of the Hon’ble National

Green Tribunal in O. A. 347 of 2016 dated 09.08.2019, and based on the

subsequent Orders of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

vide OM No. C-12027/6/2016-CSIII (pt) dated 15.01.2020, the National

Biodiversity Authority had constituted two PBR Monitoring Committees vide

NBA/15/30/2019/SBB/NGT/3533 dated 20.01.2020, “to oversee the quality of

PBRs on sample basis by evolving a suitable mechanism’. The first report of the

PBR Committees covers the meetings conducted, appraisal visits to states and

the road map for the completing the task assigned to the Committee.

MEETINGS The first meeting of the PBR Monitoring Committee was held on 5th February,

2020 at the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The minutes of

the meeting is enclosed as Annexure I. During the meeting, the officials from

Ministry and NBA presented the background for the formation of the Committee

and the terms and conditions and road map for the functioning of the Committee.

The second meeting of the Committee was held on 5th & 6th March 2020 at

Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala. The minutes of the meeting is enclosed as

Annexure II. The meeting was organized to study the good practices adopted by

Kerala in BMC formation and PBR preparation and to evolve an evaluation format

to monitor the PBRs prepared by different states. The meeting gave an

opportunity to the Committee to interact with the officials of the Kerala State

Biodiversity Board and other line departments as well as the local bodies who

were directly involved in the PBR preparation.

APPRAISAL VISITS TO STATES The committee members were formed into groups and had visited Karnataka,

Uttarakhand, Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh to

have a preliminary assessment of the process of PBR preparation in different

states. The Report on the appraisal visit by the Committee members to different

states is enclosed as Annexure III.

SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE DURING THE APPRAISAL VISITS

1. The BMCs require funds for preparing PBRs. In states like Karnataka, an

amount of Rs. 25,000/- is provided to a Grama Panchayat, which is inadequate to

prepare a good quality PBR. Unless State Governments provide a substantial

financial assistance from the funds released to the Rural Development / Panchyat

Raj Department, the BMCs would not be in a position to prepare PBRs as per the

format suggested by NBA.

2. Wherever, the progress of PBRs are reviewed at the District Collector /

Secretary level during their monthly review meetings, the progress has been

significant.

3. While NGOs function as TSGs in some states to support the preparation of

PBRs, states like Haryana have constituted TSGs with officials from the line

departments (Forest, Agriculture, Animal Husbandy, Fisheries departments,

Agricultural University etc) at the Panchayat level who have contributed

immensely with the secondary data available in their departments to assist the

BMCs in the preparation of PBRs.

4. In order to comply with the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT, some states like Uttar

Pradesh have prepared PBRs on a fast track basis and such PBRs are not as per

the format suggested by NBA. BMCs have informed that they need more time for

preparing a good quality PBR.

5. While most PBRs reviewed by the Committee members have covered major life

forms, there is gap in the inclusion of microorganisms, traditional / native varieties

of crops and traditional knowledge available with local communities.

6. While some states have geotagged their resources and included photographs,

some PBRs do not have these details which have to be insisted to authenticate

the information provided in the PBRs. CONCLUSION The Committee has finalized an evaluation format to evaluate the PBRs prepared

by different states based on an objective criteria. The Committee had planned to

visit various states during the first quarter of FY 2020-21 but due to the

unforeseen circumstances arising due to COVID-19, the Committee would plan its

strategy during mid-April 2020 on how to proceed with the visit to various states.

Meanwhile, the Committee recommends to share the 'Evaluation Format' with the

State Biodiversity Boards for their information.

Enclosures

I - Minutes of the PBR Monitoring Committee meeting held on 5th February 2020

at Delhi

II - Minutes of the PBR Monitoring Committee meeting held on 5th & 6th March

2020 at Thiruvananthapuram

II (a) - PBR Evaluation Format designed by jointly by NBA and PBR-MC.

III - Report on the Appraisal visits by Committee members to various states

1

MINUTES OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE PBR MONITORING COMMITTEE HELD ON 5TH FEBRUARY 2020 AT NEW DELHI

___________________________________________________________________ o Agenda appended Annex-1. o List of participants appended Annex-2.

___________________________________________________________________ The first meeting of the PBR (People’s Biodiversity Register) Monitoring Committee

constituted vide O.M No. NBA/15/30/2019/SBB/NGT dated 20.01.2020 of National Biodiversity

Authority, was held on 5th February, 2020 at MoEFCC, New Delhi. The meeting was co-chaired

by Smt. B.V.Umadevi, Additional Secretary, MoEF&CC and Dr. V.B.Mathur, Chairman, NBA.

Smt. B.V.Umadevi welcomed the participants of the meeting and highlighted that the two

important criteria to evaluate the quality of PBRs on a sample basis could be validation of such

PBRs by the local bodies and the subsequent technical validation.

Dr. V.B. Mathur, Chairperson, NBA drew the attention of the Monitoring Committee to

the Hon’ble NGT Order that states, ‘Monitoring Committee of the MoEFCC may oversee the

quality of PBRs on sample basis by evolving a suitable mechanism’ and steered the

deliberations towards the same.

Dr. Sujit Kumar Bajpayee, Joint Secretary, MoEF&CC requested the PBR Monitoring

Committee to fulfil its mandate as per the directions of the Hon’ble NGT.

Shri Justin Mohan, Secretary, NBA gave an overview presentation on the status of

People’s Biodiversity Register and highlighted the state of the art on the subject including the

statutory provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and the Rules there under.

Dr. V B Mathur, Chairman, NBA presented a proposed plan of work for logical

organization of the task assigned to the PBR Monitoring Committee. This was followed by a

discussion amongst the members of the committee and arriving at a consensus on the

approach and process to be adopted for evaluation of the quality of PBRs.

During the course of the meeting, the committee members discussed the following

items:-

i. The design of the evaluation framework of the PBRs including identification of criteria,

indicators and sampling strategy (GP, Block and District) for such an evaluation shall be

finalized during a scoping visit to Kerala during the first week of March 2020.

2

ii. The adequacy of PBR documentation shall be verified as per the existing PBR

Guidelines.

iii. The process followed for preparation of PBR will be verified for its legality, adequacy

and authenticity.

iv. The modalities and strategies to be adopted by the members of the committee during

evaluation, time line for submission of report, format of report etc. shall be finalized

jointly by NBA and the PBR Monitoring Committee.

The Meeting ended with Vote of Thanks to the co-Chairs, officials and members

of the PBR Monitoring Committee.

Sd/-

Justin Mohan,

Secretary – NBA.

Annex-1 Agenda of the Meeting

14.00-14.15 - Welcome remarks : Chairperson, NBA - Opening remarks : Joint Secretary/Additional Secretary, MoEFCC

14.15-14.45

- Presentation on the Status of People’s Biodiversity Register by the NBA Secretariat

14.45-16.30 Agenda items for Discussion: Terms of Reference of the Monitoring Committee Evolving a suitable mechanism / guidelines to assess the quality of

PBR Plan of work Scheduling of visits by MC-I & MC-II

16:30-17.00 - Closing remarks

Annexure -2 List of Participants of the Meeting S.No. Name Designation /Organisation E-mail

1 Mrs. B.V. Uma Devi Additional Secretary, MoEFCC [email protected] 2 Dr. V.B. Mathur Chairman, NBA [email protected] 3 Dr.Sujit Kumar Bajpayee Joint Secretary, MoEFCC [email protected] 4 Shri. J. Justin Mohan Secretary, NBA [email protected] 5 Shri.Tarun Kathula Director, CSIII, MoEFCC [email protected] 6 Dr. S.K. Khanduri Ex-PCCF, Kerala [email protected] 7 Dr. R.B.S. Rawat Ex-PCCF, Uttarakhand [email protected] 8 Dr. Joseph Bagyaraj Microbiologist and Honorary

Scientist [email protected]

9 Dr.Oommen V Oommen Ex -Chairman, SBB, Kerala [email protected] 10 Dr. D. Narasimhan Retd. Professor,

Madras Christian College [email protected]

11 Dr. Ramakrishna Ex-Director, ZSI [email protected]

12 Dr. V.G. Malathi Ex-Principal Scientist, ICAR [email protected] 13 Dr. A.K. Gupta Ex- PCCF & HOFF, Tripura [email protected] 14 Shri R.R. Shukla Ex-PCCF, Kerala [email protected] 15 Shri Arakkal Ashraf Ex-PCCF and Ex Member

Secretary, Maharashtra SBB [email protected]

16 Dr. P.K. Singh Principal Scientist, National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources

[email protected]

17 Dr. M. Sanjappa Ex-Director, BSI [email protected] 18 Dr.NeelimaJerath Ex-Member Secretary, Punjab

SBB & DG, Science City, Kapurthala

[email protected]

19 Dr. J Soundrapandi Project Manager, NBA [email protected] 20 Dr.SangitaMitra Consultant, NBA [email protected]

******

MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE PBR MONITORING COMMITTEE HELD ON 5-6 MARCH, 2020 AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

The Second Meeting of the PBR (Peoples’ Biodiversity Register) Monitoring Committee constituted vide O.M No.NBA/15/30/2019/SBB/NGT dated 20.01.2020 of National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) was held on 5th & 6th March, 2020 at Thiruvananthapuram. The meeting was chaired by Dr. V.B.Mathur, Chairman, NBA. Dr. Usha Titus, Principal Secretary, Department of Environment & holding charge of Chairperson, Kerala State Biodiversity Board, Dr. S.K. Khanduri, Chair of PBR Monitoring Committee-I and Dr. R.B.S Rawat, Chair of PBR Monitoring Committee-II, officials from NBA and KSBB participated in the meeting. The list of officials who attended the meeting is enclosed as Annexure I. Dr. V.B. Mathur, welcomed the participants of the meeting and highlighted the importance of the meeting fixed in Kerala and the need to submit the initial report of the PBR-MC on or before 31 March, 2020 to MoEFCC through NBA, and the subsequent reports once every three months. Chairperson, NBA also brought to the attention of the members that the OA 347/16 before the Hon'ble NGT case has been listed for hearing on 18 March, 2020 to review the progress of BMCs formed and PBRs prepared across various states. The Chairman pointed out that since Kerala has been a pioneer in the preparation of good quality PBRs, NBA has organized the meeting in Trivandrum to share the experiences of the KSBB on the preparation of PBRs in Kerala. Dr. Usha Titus, in her welcome remarks stated that KSBB is open to share its experience in the preparation of PBRs and the efforts taken by the state to move towards the electronic format of PBR to document the biological resources and the traditional knowledge available in the state by providing adequate safeguards. Members of the PBR Monitoring Committee presented the findings of their appraisal visits to various states during February 2020 which is enclosed as Annexure II. Dr. Balakrishnan, Member Secretary, KSBB made a power point presentation on the methods adopted by Kerala to form BMCs and prepare PBRs in all the local bodies, the support provided by the government and the challenges encountered during the process of PBR preparation and the strategies adopted to overcome the same. Visit of the PBR-Monitoring Committee to Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation The members of the PBR-Monitoring Committee visited the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation. The members were welcomed by the Deputy Mayor Adv. Rakhi Ravikumar who spoke on the functioning of the corporation and the participation of the people in the management of biodiversity. The Dy Mayor also informed the plans of the Corporation to use the PBRs for preparing a Master Plan for the city's development.

The Committee members interacted with the officials and ward counsellors of the Corporation to get a firsthand knowledge about the preparation of PBRs by the Corporation. Visit of the PBR-Monitoring Committee to Maranalloor Biodiversity Management Committee in Thiruvananthapuram district. The members of the PBR-MC visited the Maranalloor BMC in Thiruvananthapuram district. Members of the BMC were provided an overview of the functioning of the Grama Panchayat and the process adopted for the preparation of PBR. The Panchayat President informed that Rs. 7 lakhs was incurred to prepare the PBR utilizing the services of 42 volunteers for 30 days by paying them a honorarium of Rs. 50 per day. Volunteers from the Christ Nagar College in the village, helped in identifying the botanical names of the plant and animal species. A one day meeting of volunteers was held prior to the field work and subsequent to the field work to compile the data to finalize the PBR for the BMC. While one copy of the PBR was retained with the BMC, another copy was handed over the Kerala SBB for record. Funds were released by the Panchayat from the Plan funds allocated by the State Government. The Panchayat officials discussed on how they were using the contents of the PBR for micro level planning of the panchayat activities. Visit of the PBR-Monitoring Committee to Kerala Biodiversity Museum, Vallakadavu, Thiruvananthapuram The members of the PBR-MC undertook a visit to the Kerala Biodiversity Museum, an initiative of the KSBB to showcase the rich biodiversity heritage of the state. Major attractions include science onsphere, 3D theatre and the biodiversity exhibition galleries. The museum interprets the biological diversity through interactive panels, videos, exhibits and life size models. Day II (06.03.2020) NISARG Bharat – Presentation by Chairperson, NBA Dr. V.B. Mathur, Chairperson, NBA gave a presentation about the National Biodiversity Mission for Human Welfare initiated by the Prime Minister's Science, Technology and Innovation Advisory Council (PM-STIAC) for mapping all life forms in India including associated cultural and traditional practices and the plans of NBA to convert the PBRs to electronic format (E-PBRs). Quality monitoring framework for People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs) The members of the Committee discussed in detail and arrived at a framework for the evaluation of the PBRs during their visits which is enclosed as Annexure II.

The members also evolved a plan of work for their site visits during the first quarter (April-July) of FY 2020-21 which will be coordinated by NBA Secretariat. Interactions with officials of line departments The PBR Committee members interacted with officials of the Environment Department, Local Self Government Department, Forest Department, Rural Development Department, Urban Development Department, Kudumbashree Mission, Haritha Keralam Mission, Suchitwa Mission etc to understand their role in the functioning of BMCs. The meeting ended with a vote of thanks proposed by Secretary, NBA.

Sd/- Secretary - NBA.

Annexure - I

List of participants

S.No. Name Designation / Organisation 1 Dr. V.B. Mathur Chairman, NBA 2 Shri J. Justin Mohan Secretary, NBA 3 Dr. Usha Titus Principal Secretary, Dept of Environment,

Kerala 4 Dr. S.K. Khanduri Ex-PCCF, Kerala 5 Dr. R.B.S. Rawat Ex-PCCF, Uttarakhand 6 Dr. Oommen V Oommen Ex -Chairman, SBB, Kerala 7 Dr. D. Narasimhan Retd. Professor, Madras Christian College 8 Dr. Ramakrishna Ex-Director, ZSI 9 Dr. V.G. Malathi Ex-Principal Scientist, ICAR 10 Dr. A.K. Gupta Ex- PCCF & HOFF, Tripura 11 Shri R.R. Shukla Ex-PCCF, Kerala 12 Shri Arakkal Ashraf Ex-PCCF and Ex Member Secretary,

Maharashtra SBB 13 Dr. P.K. Singh Principal Scientist, National Bureau of

Animal Genetic Resources 14 Dr. M. Sanjappa Ex-Director, BSI 15 Dr. Neelima Jerath Ex-Member Secretary, Punjab SBB & DG,

Science City, Kapurthala 16 Dr. J Soundrapandi Project Manager, ASEAN 17 Dr. Sangita Mitra Sr. Consultant-NBA

Kerala State Biodiversity Board 18 Dr. V. Balakrishnan Member Secretary, KSBB 19 Dr. Preetha.N. KSBB 20 Dr. Baiju.P.T. Sr. Programme Coordinator, KSBB 21 Ms. Mithrambika.N.B. Programme Coordinator 22 Ms. Aneesha Ani

Benadict Data Analyst, KSBB

23 Mr. Praveen .K.P. Graphic Designer, KSBB 24 Dr. S. Rajasekharan KSBB 25 Ms. Reshnu Raj.R.S. Project Assistant, UNDP 26 Ms. Shahnas.K.F. UNDP-NBA Intern, KSBB 27 Dr. K. Satheesh Kumar Member, KSBB

Officials of Line Departments of State Govt. 28 Ms. Usha.M.K. Jt. Development Commissioner,

Commissionorate of Rural Development.

29 Dr. Ummuselma. C Jt. Director (Health), Dept of Urban Affairs 30 Dr. K. VIjayakumar Sr. Scientist, KSCSTE 31 Dr. P. Harinarayanan Pl. Scientist , KSCSTE 32 Mr. Sanjayan Kumar Conservator of Forests, O/O PCCF(WL) 33 Sri O. Mendanmari H. Joint Director of Panchayats, O/o the

Director of PIs 34 Ms. Haripriyadevi.V.V Technical Officer, Haritha Keralam

Mission 35 Ms. Reshma Raj. S. Resource person, Haritha Keralam

Mission 36 Ms. M.S. Niranjana Programme Officer, Kudumbashree

Mission 37 Mr. Raviraj.R.

Dy. Devlpt Commissioner & Programme Officer, MGNREGS State Mission

38 Mr. Anoop. P.K. Programme Officer (Health), Suchitwa Mission

of 4

National Biodiversity Authority

Monitoring Framework for Evaluating Quality of People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs)

Part A • Name of BMC: Local body (Urban/Rural)

Taluk/Block/Mandal District State

• Chair of the BMC (ex-officio, if any)

• Secretary of the BMC (ex-officio, if any) • Date of BMC constitution (Date/ Ref of resolution)

• Date/ month/ year of PBR Preparation

• Date/ month/ year of PBR Validation

• Agency (ies) involved in preparation of PBR: (TSG, institutions/volunteers etc.)

• Effort of digitization of the PBRs by the SBB? Scan or database formats.

• TK Register, if any prepared and maintained by BMC

• Expenditure incurred in preparation of PBR and source of funds

• Use of PBR if any made by the BMC/ SBB

• Names of members of PBR Quality Monitoring Team

• Date(s) of the evaluation exercise • Names of the officials/ persons/line departments consulted

• Observations / Recommendations by the Monitoring Team (not more than 15-20

lines)

of 4

The contents of the PBR includes_____________ species of wild flora including herbs/shrubs

and trees; ____________species of wild fauna; ___________species/varieties of cultivated crops

including horticultural and vegetable crops; ____________ species/breeds of domesticated

livestock/poultry; ____________species of fishes, ____________ species of microbes and

___________TKs.

Part B

The PBR Quality Evaluation Framework consists of 3 elements viz. Context, Process and Structure. These three elements carry equal weightage as all these elements play an equally significant role in assessing the quality of PBR. The elements are to be assessed using the “Indicators” which are 3, 4 and 5 each in respect of the 3 elements i. e. context, process and structure

Criterion 1: Context

Indicator Explanation Source of information for assessment

Score 1-10 (Highly Inadequate to

Completely Adequate)

BMC and local body members are aware of the provisions and procedures related to PBR preparation

SBB/TSG might have conducted interactions on use and importance of PBRs. Records of meetings and responses of BMC members in this regard can give an idea.

BMC has received training / sensitisation modules of SBB

Such actions of SBB would sensitise the BMC. Participation of BMC members in the exercise would provide a better linkage to the process and better understanding of PBR.

BMC and local body have formally discussed the process of PBR in their area

Validation of the PBR after presentation and discussion would provide better understanding of the PBR and its use.

Score (Out of 30)

Criterion 2: Process

Involvement of experts in data collection – Technical support Group and its involvement

Profile of TSG and involvement of experts in the subsequent interactions would impact the quality of PBR.

of 4

BMC members / SBB oversaw the progress of data collection / collation/ analysis

Extent of involvement of the BMC members would be an important input for quality of PBR

Consultation/ participation process followed with stakeholders (Meetings/ PRAs/Workshops/ Fairs / Festivals)

consultations with stake holders/ people coming to events like weekly market day to sell their agro products or wild gathered products will be very useful. This is the step 4 of the process in guidelines. Gender will also be a parameter in this. Diligence shown in identification of stakeholder groups using an inclusive approach.

Existence/reference of the existing information on biodiversity (secondary literature)

Secondary information is a vital component of the register

Correct scientific identity of the bioresources

Use of photographs, maps, graphics, data, seasonality, geo tagging, IUCN status (additionally people’s perceived data on local species/land races will be more valuable. This would cover species/ races reduced due overexploitation or obscured/replaced by high yielding hybrids due to economic gains sacrificing quality traits) etc. in descriptions adds value to the information given in any document.

Total (out of 50)

Criterion 3: Structure

Have all the relevant formats been filled with appropriate details?

Quality and adequacy of the information provided in the relevant formats can indicate quality. Seasonal collection of information is part of this.

Have the groups been indexed for

A well indexed register would have ease of

of 4

ease of access with contents and page numbers?

access to the contents. Bioresource wise or mere format wise index would facilitate perusal of the PBR differently

Correct scientific identities of bioresources (both wild, cultivated and domesticated) along with available vernacular names.

This will include validated correct scientific names and credentials of the validating agency

TK related details captured with list of resources and name of users/ practitioners/ knowledge holders*

How elaborate is the information on the traditional use in the columns for ‘Associated TK’ in the PBR formats within the local body area, and elsewhere also and how it has been safeguarded from misuse.

Out of 40

Score Sheet 1

Element Name

2 Number

of Indicator

s

3 Maximum Score

(@ 10 per indicator)

4 Score given

5 % Weighted Score (One third for each

element)

6 Final Score

Context 3 30 Process 5 50

Structure 4 40 Over all 12 120

Report on PBR Appraisal by the Committee members

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY KARNATAKA STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD

In pursuance to the letter No. NBA/15/30/2019-20/SBB/NGT/Vol.III dated 10th February 2020 of the National Biodiversity Authority, Chennai, a team of below noted Monitoring Committee Members (hereinafter Members) performed appraisal visit to the Karnataka State Biodiversity Board (KBB) on 2nd March 2020 to oversee the quality of the People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs).

Members

1. Dr. M. Sanjappa 2. Dr. Ramakrishna 3. Dr. J. Bagyaraj, and 4. Dr. A. K. Gupta

1. Discussion with Shri Virendra Singh, Member Secretary, Karnataka KBB and his

team: The following members of the KBB were present: a. Dr. B.V. Purshotam, Dy. Director b. Ms. B.N. Aishwarya, PBR Consultant c. Mr. N. Nikhil, Technical Executive d. Mr. Md. Sheffi Korabu, Technical Executive The discussion was ensued with self-introduction of all the participants in the meeting. • The Members had a preliminary discussion with the Member Secretary, Karnataka

SBB during which the MS, KBB briefed the Members about the constitution of the Board and the current status on the constitution of the BMCs and documentation of the PBRs.

• The MS informed that all the BMCs have already been constituted and the committees have also been imparted training on key aspects of their roles and responsibilities.

• The MS informed that a total of 2000 PBRs are available for inspection and appraisal.

• The MS informed that the forest department involvement in the activities of the KBB is ensured through monthly meetings with the DFOs who are the NODAL OFFICERS for KBB through video conferencing and it has created good impact in generating awareness.

• The MS further informed that NGOs are engaged in imparting training to the BMCs for

documentation of the PBRs. Another round of training is envisaged further.

• The MS informed that huge number of traditional knowledge has already been documented but in absence of clear policy on sharing of such confidential information and patenting issues, all those documents on traditional knowledge are sealed and kept under lock and key without any use of that vital information. This is a matter of concern and need to be resolved within the gambit of the relevant rules and regulations (Action: KBB and NBA please).

• The MS explained the process of PBR vetting, which is done at two levels. The first level vetting is done by a Technical Experts Committee (consisting of agriculture, animal husbandry and zoology experts) and TSG (consisting members from 9 line departments). The second level of vetting is done in the office of the MS, KBB. It is ensured that nothing that is not in proper is allowed to be made part of final PBR document. The MS, KBB informed that it is due to severe vetting process that about 7000 PBRs in the past had been returned for revision as those did not stand the vetting at the second level.

• The MS, KBB informed that the forest personnel (of the rank of forest range officer and above) have been involved/assisting in documentation of the PBRs and they have also been trained to this effect.

• The MS further informed that the KBB has already taken up a project of National Medicinal Plants Board on documenting the herbs and shrubs in the forest areas. To this effect, reports from 39 forest divisions have already been received in last four and half years and later the project has also spread to asses all plant species (not only medicinal plants). Already, assessments of the herbs and shrubs have been done. This is going to facilitate documentation of the biodiversity resources found across the forest jurisdictions.

• The MS, KBB also informed about the GEF project as well having four components (training, publicity & awareness, feasibility studies on some select plant species, and value chain analysis of commercial species).

• All BMCs have been constituted as per the Act and Rules through a Resolution by the Gram Panchayat. The Members did see some of those resolutions. The KBB has stored and catalogued all such copies of the Resolution meticulously so that their safety is ensured and retrieval is easy and fast.

• To ensure, synergy between the Gram Panchayat, the President of the GP has been made the Chairman of the BMC and GP Secretary is also the member secretary of the BMC.

• The KBB is also attempting to have BMC as one of the standing committees of the GP and a proposal has already been mooted to the Rural Development Department for amendment in the Panchayat Act.

• The BMCs have mandatory presence of two women members, of which one is either ST or SC, as per the mandate stipulated in BMC

• MS, KBB also appraised the members of Evaluation Committee of some of the difficulties faced in getting the PBR from NGO in Mysore district, by the Nodal Officer

• The DFO, Social Forestry is the Nodal Officer of the BMCs for the purpose of release of funds received from the state government to the BMCs. The KBB believes that BMCs are not capable of handling the accounts on their own. This particular aspects is against the target of making BMCs empowered in all aspects to take responsibilities in future. The Members felt that the KBB must attempt at making BMCs empowered even in accounting and finance matters at least in phases and a concerted plan need be devolved for this (Action : KBB please).

• The GP facilitates various training schedules for the BMCs. This is a very good arrangement to ensure synergy.

• Financial assistance for the preparation of the PBRs. At the GP level it is INR 25,000 (of this 2,500 is for the Nodal Officer for office expenses and therefore a sum of 22,500 is paid for the preparation of each PBR); at the Taluka level it is INR 80,000 and at the district level the rate is INR 2 lakhs. The DFO, Social Forestry, as NO, engages a team of four (1 lecturer and 3 students) for GP level PBR documentation who are to prepare the same in 3-6 months at a cost of INR 25,000 including the printing. The visits to the fields are limited to only 2, which is very minimal considering the vast information to be collected for 31 odd formats (Action : Visit during different seasons for collection of information may please be allowed –KBB).

• The KBB members opined that the rate of GP level PBR documentation is very less and often the team registers their concerns to this effect and have urged the Board to raise the rate.

• The Members, while evaluating the copies of the PBRs provided to them by the KSBB noted few glaring misrepresentations of certain species shown as present in a given GP of the state, while their presence was not at all possible as per the geographical distribution of said species – this could be due to (i) less number of visits to the site and (ii) lack of substantial contributions from the members of the Technical Support Group (as informed by the members of the KSBB team).

• The Members have also noted that the photographs presented in the PBRs need be rearranged as per the themes (at least format wise).

• The documentation of the Traditional Knowledge is more or less lacking in the PBRs so appraised during this visit by the Members.

• The status of PBR documentation as on 26th February 2020 stands at: total GPs are 6020, of which the PBR is documented for 2097 GPs leaving a balance of 3929 PBRs

to be documented. At the Taluk level, of the total Talukas numbering at 176, only 24 PBRs have been so far documented.

• Geo-tagging of the photographs has to be done.

• No ABS has so far been attempted; at least attempts could be done for prompting BMCs to make use of the provisions of section 412 (iii) of the BDA for levying fee etc. on the biological resources that are commercially harvested from a given GP.

• List of PBRs evaluated is as follows: o Bidarakka Gram Panchayat, Holenarasipura Taluk, Hassan District o Khelgao Gram Panchayat, Athani Taluk, Belagavi District o Taluk Panchayat, Kumta, Uttarakannada District o Taluk Panchayat Udupi, Uduppi District o Hanasi GGram Panchayat, Hagaribommanahalli Tauk, Bellary District

2. Visit to Hanchikuppe BMC under Magadi Taluk/ Ramanagara district

The Members then visited Hanchikuppe GP and interacted with the Hanchikuppe BMC and other members involved in the documentation of the PBR of BMC. The following were present during the interaction: a) The Chairman of the Hanchikuppe BMC b) The Range Forest Officer. c) Mrs Mamata, lecturer, the leader for PBR documentation(Co-ordinator) d) Members of the Hanchikuppe BMC e) Local villagers f) Local Vaidya (Nati Vaidya) g) Ms. B.N. Aishwarya, PBR Consultant, KBB h) Shri Nikhil, Technical Executive, KBB

Ms. Aishwarya initiated the discussion by narrating in brief the purpose of this visit and also introduced to the BMC members and other participants about the Members of the visiting Committee. This followed a detailed description of the process adopted in the documentation of the PBR by Mrs. Mamata:

• The BMC members are very proud of their GP which they consider as one best in the entire Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara district.

• The meeting was conducted with the BMC members for the documentation of the PBR as a starting process.

• Although, on the issue of real economic value of the biological resources in the GP, Mrs. Mamata said the villagers and the BMC members are not aware, yet, they want to protect these resources as an integral part of their life style – it reflects about the higher level of awareness amongst them.

• The Range Forest Officer, who was present in the meeting did confirm participation of the forest personnel in the process of PBR documentation – a good and healthy sign that might ensure sustainability of these efforts.

• Mrs. Mamata did accept that the current PBR is not exhaustive as both fund (INR 22,500 per PBR as honorarium) and time (3-4 months and two visits) was less and therefore many biodiversity elements have remained un recorded. This is a serious issue in the process of documentation of the PBR and the Board must think about this to ensure entirety of the PBR documentation.

• Mrs. Malathi is aware on the importance of recording seasonal variations in the PBR but was unable to do so due to paucity of time and fund at hand. The KBB has to take up this issue to ensure that seasonal recordings of some of most important biological resources, especially that might constitute as important sources for ABS mechanism, need be looked into seriously as a policy.

• A serious gap was detected when it was learnt during discussion that neither any land races are available and nor are recorded. In fact, PBR, as a document, happens to be the only possible document that is prepared with the help of the local villagers, that must record about the land races without fail. (Action :The KBB has to take a call on this issue as well).

• The local Vaidya who was present in the meeting, did share his versions on the availability of the plant species being used by him for local health traditions. He is, however, not ready to divulge any detailed information on TK. This is another field needing detailed deliberations as a separate project to convince these traditional healers on the importance of patenting and sharing their knowledge to be used for the welfare of the humankind and for not only few those who can access this being in proximity of the Vaidya. The TK has to reach far and wide for use by all those who are potential users. Yes, necessary arrangements need be done under BD Act to ensure economic benefits to those knowledge holders. The KBB need to also deliberate on this.

• The participation of the villagers and knowledgeable persons in the given GP need be ensured to capture historical perspective of natural bio-resources over the years – this shall reflect the trend of changes of given species, some of which are THREATENED species.

• The linkages of the PBR with the ABS process need be clearly established, which is both a legal requirement besides helping the given BMC to commercially dispose off for revenue earnings.

• A team of three persons (of which only one is qualified but only in limited field of knowledge) is not enough to explore all that is available in the form of biodiversity in the given GP (Action : KBB to involve more knowledgable persons in the field).

• The certification given by the individual/institution/NGO who are engaged in the documentation of the PBR is not legally tenable, since the PBR is supposed to be documented by the BMCs. However, BMC may take the technical assistance from any one of choices given. Therefore, such certificates as attached within the PBRs need be removed and replaced with the BMC’ certification (Action KBB).

• The issue of ownership and custody of the PBR is yet to be addressed and resolved. (Action – NBA, KBB)

(Dr. M. Sanjappa) (Dr. Ramakrishna)

(Dr. J. Bagyaraj) (Dr. A. K. Gupta)

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY UTTARAKHAND STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD

Members

1. Dr S K Khanduri

2. Dr. R.B.S.Rawat

Dates of visit:

14 Feb 2020 – Initial discussion with the Member Secretary and the SBB team and perusal of two Peoples Biodiversity Registers

1. Village Dhaura, Lamgarha block, Almora District. 2. Village Dudhai, Sahaspur block, Dehradun District.

26 Feb 2020 – Detailed interactions with the stakeholders – SBB officials, Technical Support Groups and BMC members. Foundation for Rural Development (FORD), Dehradun; Uttar Resource Development Society Shrinagar; MAATY Dehradun and HISER Dehradun.

Interactions with the Mr SS Rasaily IFS, Member Secretary, Uttarakhand SBB,Mr Dhananjay Prasad PFS Deputy Director and Mr Kaul, Dy Director on 1 February 2020 gave an idea of the working of the SBB and the actions taken towards setting up of BMCs and preparation of the PBRs. Uttarakhand had started work on the PBRs way back before 2014. All the local bodies have set up their BMCs and PBRs have been prepared for all BMCs. ABS rules were notified on 21 November 2014 and the work on setting up BMCs and preparation of PBRs had started well before that. NBA allocated funds to SBB on 2014 January and later in 2015 also for PBR preparation which has been effectively utilised by the SBB. Guidelines for BMCs as well as PBR preparation have been printed in January 2015 and kept in the BMC custody as well as with the SBB.

SBB is also working on Biocultural Community Protocols (BCPs) to include the processes and regulations needed to be adopted when need of accessing the bioresources of the region arises. This is expected to cover the processes for regulating access and use of the resources at the disposal of the communities, with due respect to their customs and culture related to the former.

Interaction with members of four (4 nos) Technical Sub group members and SBB team on 26 February 2020 provided an insight on the process followed which was primarily based on interaction with the communities and field work. SBB constituted 32 Technical Sub groups for assisting all the local bodies for preparation of PBRs. The Board also maintains a panel of experts in taxonomy, animal and plant identification, animal husbandry, entomology etc for assisting the TSGs/ BMCs in identification, authentication and correction of nomenclature of the bioresources listed by the BMCs in the PBR, as most of the information collection happens in vernacular.PBRs are as a practice presented before the BMC and are printed after validation in the BMC.

Observations

• TSGs have been constituted after careful scrutiny by selecting the groups based on the scientific profile of the team members, credentials related to their work and commitmentto the development and conservation of natural, bioresources of the region and community outreach status. Several team members linked to the TSGs were known to be research scholars and faculty of the regional universities and colleges.

• The task of PBR preparation through TSGs has been done on closely supervised contracts as per the guidelines of NBA/ SBB through tripartite agreements between SBB, BMC and TSG. Funds received from NBA in 2014 and 2015 have been utilised through the respective BMC as per the conditions of the NBA communicated with the sanction orders. Later funds were also mobilised under some other externally aided projects. The work of PBRs after NGT order is being done through the TSGs with anticipation of the grants from the State Government or elsewhere.

• Supervision from the SBB and their panel of experts in terms of identification and corrections in the entries has improved the quality of the documentation.

• In the earlier cases, TSGs undertook consultation and documentation in winter, summer and rainy season to capture maximum possible life forms in the PBRs. Post NGT order period, data of initial rounds of the field visit only could be provided along with secondary information from the people. The information is expected to be enriched gradually. Financial resources arecritical constraint as travel in remote hill areas, which involves trekking and camping as well, is a tedious work in terms of time and cost.

• Overall, the entries in the PBRs generally cover the major life forms. For covering the traditional knowledge related to the documented resources, some more work is needed. Groups of life forms of less common taxa like fungi particularly mushrooms, liverworts, lichens and various processing traditions like brewing, retting, composting, colour preparations, preparations of cosmeceuticals like shikakai, soap nut, fibre extraction of Grewia, nettle etc need to be covered and documented.

(Dr S K Khanduri)

(Dr. R.B.S.Rawat)

***

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARDS OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

The following Committee members visited SBB Punjab Biodiversity Board and Haryana Biodiversity Board on 02.03.2020 for preliminary evaluation of status of BMC and PBR formation: 1. Dr. NeelimaJerath, Director General, PGSC 2. Dr. P.K. Singh, NBAGR

1. Visit to Punjab State Biodiversity Board

The following representatives of PBB were present: 1 Member Secretary 2 Sr. Scientific Officer 3 Scientific Officer 4 Technical Officer (2)

The issues discussed are as below:

i) PBB informed that: a) Constitution of BMC

• All BMCs established by duly passing Resolution • District Level: 22 districts

o All BMCsestablished (progress 100%). o 13 PBRs prepared, 9 remaining, progress 59%

• Block Level: 150 Blocks o All BMCs established (Progress 100%), o 15 PBRs prepared, 135 PBRs remaining, progress 10%

• Gram Panchayat Level: Total Gram Panchayats 13252, o BMCs established in 13193 GP (Progress 99.6%), in remaining

59 BMCs, certain issues prevail which are being sorted out. o 1700 PBRs prepared, remaining 11542 (progress 12.8%)

• ULBs: Total ULBs 167 o BMCs constituted in 20 ULBs (Progress 12%) o No PBR yet prepared (Progress 0%)

Sample PBRs ( good, bad and average) were seen.

b) Cumulative progress: a. BMCs constituted in the State: 13428 out of 13591 b. Total number of PBRs prepared: 1728 out of 13591

c) Timelines for completion a. Remaining BMCs at Village level: by 30.04.2020 b. Remaining BMCs in ULBS: 31.03.2020 c. Remaining PBRs at District, block and village level: 31.07.2020 d. Remaining PBRs in ULBs: 31.06.2020

d) Out of PBRs prepared, 42 PBRs has been prepared directly under the supervision of PBB i.e. as below: • PBRs prepared by PBB itself: 7 • PBRs got prepared through FRLHT: 6 • PBRs got prepared through WWF, New Delhi: 3 • PBRs got prepared by NGO (Institute of Ecology and Environment,

Pathankot): 14 • PBRs got prepared by Akal University, Bathinda: 12

e) All remaining PBRs have beenprepared by Department of Rural Development

and Panchayats. However, only skeletal training has been provided. f) The PBR format as specified by NBA has been followed in all PBRs g) PBRs prepared by FRLHT and WWF are based on PRA exercises and cover

all seasons. These are well made except that all bio-resources have not been captured in photographs. There is also a scope to record traditional varieties of crop plants which were earlier present /grown in the state but are currently not in use.

h) The PBRs prepared by DRDP capture a few essentials but need improvement. i) The funds for District, Block and Village level PBRs prepared under direct

supervision of PBB were provided by NBA as per its norms. For PBRs prepared by DRDP, no funds were provided and the expenditure was met out of DRDP own funds.

j) Information captured in none of the PBRs has been used for ABS or any other activity till date even though the state has a major bio-resource trade mandi in Amritsar.

k) TSGs comprising experts from line departments (Forest, Agriculture, fisheries, Horticulture, Animal Husbandry) have been constituted at district level. These members provide guidance to Block level BMCs also.

l) The information contained in the PBRs is available in Soft copies in word format. However, References are generally not listed. List of individuals who have contributed data is also incomplete. Indexing has been done, pictures used are generally downloaded from the internet and are not from the site.

m) Geotagging of data needs to be done. However, the overall process adopted for establishment of BMCs and preparation of PBRs is generally correct.

2. Visit to Haryana Biodiversity Board

The following representatives of HSBB were present: 1) Chairman, 2) Member Secretary 3) Other HSBB Officers/ officials 4) TSG Members:

a. Rep., Wild life Institute of India, Dehradun b. Rep., Himalayan Institute for Sustainable Env& Research (HISER), D.Dun

c. Rep., Skill, Art and Beyond, Bhopal d. Rep., NH Consulting PvtLtd.Gurgaon e. Rep., Everain, Delhi f. Rep., Datamation, Delhi g. Rep., Maaty Biodiversity Conservation, D.Dun

The issues discussed were as below: HSBB informed that:

1) Constitution of BMC

• All BMCs have been constituted within one year by duly passing Resolution as per NBA norms.All BMCs established. However, the women members generally do not participate actively.

• District Level: 22 districts

o All BMCs established (progress 100%). o No PBRs prepared

• Block Level: 126 Blocks o All BMCs established (Progress 100%) o All 126 PBRs prepared, progress 100%

Gram Panchayat Level: Total Gram Panchayats 6201 o All BMCs established, Progress 100%). o Work on 1615 PBRs initiated.

• ULBs: Total ULBs 85 o All BMCs constituted (Progress 100%) o No PBR yet prepared (Progress 0%)

2) Timelines for completion a. Ongoing PBRs will be completed by 31.03.2020 b. Remaining PBRs at village level: 30.09.2020 c. All PBRs in ULBs: 30.09.2020 d. The Block PBRs will be complied to form the district PBRs. The work will

be completed by 31.10.2020.

3) The Haryana Biodiversity Board has assigned the work to its TSG members. Each agency has been allocated blocks for preparation of PBRs.

4) Sample PBRs prepared by some of the agencies were seen. 5) Some of these agencies have undertaken PRA, as well as, awareness exercises. 6) The PBR formats have been followed but the data in most cases needs to be

improved. The pictures of bio-resources need to be adequately incorporated. Some Agencies have also recorded short videos.

7) Funds have been provided by HSBB. The agencies identified for preparation of PBRs have been advised to contact line departments for verification of data.

8) The information contained in the PBRs has been submitted in hard copy. The Board has been advised to obtain soft copies also for future use.

9) References are generally not listed. List of individuals who have contributed data is also not available. Indexing needs improvement. Pictures used are generally are not from the site.Geotagging of data needs to be done

Whereas the overall process adopted for establishment of BMCs is generally correct, the process of preparation of PBRs is flawed as TSG members should be individual experts and are for technical support and not to be assigned PBR preparation works on paid basis.

(Dr. NeelimaJerath)

(Dr. P.K. Singh)

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY MAHARASHTRA STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD

Member

Shri. Arakkal Ashraf

The undersigned visited MSBB office Nagpur on 15 /02/ 2020 and held detailed discussions with Member Secretary Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board Nagpur to understand the procedure/ strategy adopted by the state to achieve the targets regarding the constitution of BMCs in the rural as well as urban local bodies as well as the status of PBR preparation in the state.

The Member Secretary informed that the state has achieved100% target as regards BMC constitution ie in all 28654 local bodies of the state ( rural and urban put together) ,BMCs have been constituted. Details of BMC constitution local body wise is attached separately.

Sr.no.

Local Bodies Target Achievement No. Of Resolution

received1 Gram Panchayat 27876 27876 27876

2 Panchayat Samiti 351 351 351

3 Zilla Parishad 34 34 34

4 Nagar Panchayat 128 128 128

5 Nagar Parishad 238 238 238

6 Maha Nagarpalika 27 27 27

Total 28654 28654 28654

Status of BMC Formation in Maharashtra as on 15-02-2020

He also informed that as regards PBR preparation, the state has achieved 62 percentage of the target ie; out of 28654 PBRs to be prepared,17820 PBRs have been prepared as on 15/02/2020 while many more are in the final stages of preparation.Analysis of the achievement shows that about 82 % of PBRs in the urban bodies have been prepared while the achievement in the rural bodies is to the tune of 61 % .Among the rural bodies, Gram Panchayats have achieved 63 % while the achievement of Panchayat samitis and Zilla Parishads is low.

Details of PBR preparation is attached separately.

Sr no Local Bodies Target Achievement Percentage of Achievement

1 Gram Panchayat 27876 17464 63

2 Panchayat Samiti 351 22 6

3 Zilla Parishad 34 3 9

4 Nagar Panchayat 128 104 81

5 Nagar Parishad 238 206 87

6 Maha Nagarpalika 27 22 81

Total 28654 17821 62

Status of PBR preparation in Maharashtra as on 15-02-2020

Reasons given by the Member Secretary attributing to the spurt in the preparation of PBR are as below : 1 Shock effect of the NGT order which led to the disappearance of administrative inertia among the line departments with respect to implementation of the provisions of BD Act in general and preparation of PBR in particular. 2 Video conferencing of all the District Collectors ,CEO Zilla Parishads and Municipal Commissioners taken by the Chief Secretary, in the wake of NGT order, in which the Chief Secretary underlined the importance and the need to adopt a time bound strategy for the preparation of PBRs throughout the state 3 Regular monitoring and follow up done by Principal Secretary (Forests) on a monthly basis during which the work done by each district with respect to the target allotted for PBR preparation was monitored and necessary instructions to clear the backlog were issued by him regularly. 4 Wholehearted involvement of all District Collectors, Municipal Commissioners, CEO ZP ,Deputy CEO of Panchayati Raj and BDOs in the preparation process 5 Workshops organised by MSBB for BMC members and officials of line departments for awareness generation as requested by CEOs. 6 Continuous guidance and technical support provided by NGOs / Technical Support Groups for preparation of PBR at BMC level Evaluation visits to BMCs Amgaon (Budruk)BMC in Sakoli tehsil of Bhandara district and Khairi chargaon BMC in Umred taluka of Nagpur district were selected for interaction with BMC members. Visits to Amgaon (Bk) BMC in Bhandara district and Khairi Chargaon BMC in Nagpur district were organised by MSBB. DCF Bhandara , DFO MSBB, BDO Sakoli, Gram Sevaks of Amgaon and Sakoli ,members of Amgaon BMC ,members of NGO which helped in the preparation of PBR were present during the interaction session in Amgaon BMC while DFO

MSBB, Deputy CEO Nagpur, BDO Umred, members of Khairi BMC,Gram sevak of Khairi, members of NGO which helped in preparation of PBR were present in Khairi GP Office. Comparative statement of the details of information of both BMCs collected from PBR documents is attached for ready reference. Primary Information regarding PBRs prepared by Amgaon & Khairi BMCs Sr. no.

Particulars Information

1. Name of Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC)

Amgaon (Budruk) Khairi (Chargaon)

2. Gram Panchayat Amgaon Bu Khairi (Chargaon) 3. Panchayat Samiti Sakoli Umred 4. District Bhandara Nagpur

Primary information about Village

5. Population 780 1249

6. Male Population 413 642

7. Female Population 367 607

8. No. of Cattle

12 15

9. Occupation Farming, Tendu leaves collection, Animal husbandry, Dairy farming etc

Farming, Tendu leaves collection, Animal husbandry, Dairy farming etc

10. Geographical Area 479.76 Ha 3692.18 Ha

11. Agricultural Area 197 Ha 1355.64 Ha

12. Vaidus/ Hakims/ People having Traditional Knowledge regarding Biological Resources

1. Dayaram Khandate

2. Prakash Kalsarpe

3. Arvind Neware

1. Motiram Durve 2. Vasanta B. Madavi 3. Madhukar B. Madavi 4. Moreshwar H. Parteki 5. Mohan Irpate 6. Jadhav S. Irpate

13. Water Source Khediya Lake, Cannals, Wells and Bore- wells etc

Lake, Cannals, Wells and Bore- wells etc

14. Date of BMC Formation

15-08-2017 27-01-2016

15. Name of BMC Members No. of Members – 8

Mrs. Kiranbai D. Meshram Ghanshyam S. Madavi Mrs. Sangita M. Shende Mrs. Mandabai M. Koram Mr. Ramchandra Meshram Mr. Milind R. Kapgate Mr. Aniruddha M. Shahare Mr. Suresh C. Meshram

No. of Members – 8

Mrs. Varsha M. Pohankar Mr. Narayan M. Durve Mrs. Sarita V. Sarate Mrs. Alka C. Kodape Mr. Rajendra Kolse Mr. Manohar Raut Mr. Maroti Waghare Mr. S.E. Rehpade

16. Date of starting PBR Preparation

June 2019 June 2017

17. Expert Persons / NGOs who has helped and contributed in the PBR Preparation Process

Ramsagar Grameen bahu uddeshiya Sanstha Sonegaon Dr. H.A. Meshram, Veterinary Doctor Mr. R.D. Kodame, Forest Guard Dr Dilip Bisen Kishor Janbandhu

Nisarg Vidyan sanstha Nagpur Dr. Trambak Bandre, Microbiologist Dr. Lena Konde, Botanist, Mr. Dilip Chichmalatpure Dr. Sanjay Konde, Agriculture Scientist Mr. Abhinav V. Ghuge, Agriculture Biotechnology Expert Mr. Praful Bhamburkar, Wildlife Trust Of

India (WTI)

18. Organisational Structure of NGO involved in PBR Preparation

Mr. Dilip S. Bisen, Founder, Ramsagar Gramin Bahu-uddeshiya Sanstha, Sonegaon Mr. Kishor C. Janbandhu Project Coordinator, Ramsagar Gramin Bahu-uddeshiya Sanstha, Sonegaon

Dr. Vijay Ghuge, Founder, Nisarg Vigyan Sanstha, Nagpur Mr. Dipak Shahu, Project Director, Nisarg Vigyan Sanstha, Nagpur

19. Methods used in PBR Preparation

1. Discussion with villagers about the Act and benefits of PBR followed by training sessions with villagers regarding biological resources and traditional knowledge , collection of information by field survey and photographs of the area and personally communicating with the.

2. Information collection and validation by officials of line depts Village Development Officer, Agriculture Officer, Officials of Forest Department, Fisheries & Animal etc.

3. Validating and correcting the PBR draft with the help of domain experts before approval by BMC.

20. Are the villagers aware and sensitized regarding implementation of BD Act, rules, BMC, ABS and PBR?

Yes, Villagers are very well sensitized and aware of the implementation of BD Act and Rules.

Yes, Villagers are very well sensitized and aware of the implementaion of BD Act and Rules.

21. Time period for making rough draft of PBR and collecting primary unprocessed information

June 2019- December 2019

June 2017- June 2019

22. Technical support and guidance from Technical support group (TSG) of Zilla Parishad and Experts of Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board is obtained or not? Also name the person who provided support?

Technical guidance was sought from Dr. N.R. Ugemuge, Professor Emeritus, MSBB, Nagpur and Mr. Nishikant B. Shivankar, Biodiversity Project Fellow, MSBB, Nagpur

Technical guidance was sought from Dr. Dharmendra Sinh, Junior Biodiversity Fellow, MSBB, Nagpur and Mr. Shrirang r. Maddalwar, Biodiversity Project Fellow, MSBB, Nagpur

23. Is the PBR copy computerised or not?

Yes Yes

24. Date of Validation of PBR by the BMC

29-11-2019 28-11-2019

25. Are any rare, threatened or endangered species mentioned in the PBR?

Yes, Some rare fish species have been mentioned

No

26. Training programs conducted for PBR preparation at local levels?

Yes, training programs were conducted twice for villagers at

Yes, training programs were conducted four times for

local level by the concerned NGO.

villagers at local level by the concerned NGO.

27. Were training programs conducted for PBR preparation at local levels?

Yes, training programs were conducted twice for villagers at local level by the concerned NGO.

Yes, training programs were conducted four times for villagers at local level by the concerned NGO.

Observations and remarks on the basis of the interaction with members of both BMCs The villagers, especially women, were well aware of the functions and responsibilities of the BMC as well as the process of PBR preparation and its importance The technical support group and MSBB had organised sensitization workshops in the BMCs in which the members had taken part Information regarding the bio resources available in both BMC areas were collected with the help of villagers. PBR was prepared after conducting PRA exercise Details of people having traditional knowledge had been included in the PBR. It was observed that the vaidus were reluctant to part with their knowledge . As the prime occupation of villagers of Amgaon(Bk) was fisheries oriented, due to the large no of water bodies present in the village,the number of traditional healers were less compared to Khairi which was adjacent to Umred Karandla Wild Life sanctuary and as most of the people were dependant on forests for their livelihood. All relevant proformas had been filled up . However mistakes in scientific names as well as some spelling mistakes were noticed Participation of line departments specially forest and fisheries was observed in PBR preparation . Photographs included in the PVR were neither dated nor geotagged. PBR was discussed in the BMC meeting before it was approved. However both PBRs were yet to be scrutinized and validated at MSBB level. Quality of both PBRs was satisfactory.

(Arakkal Ashraf)

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY UTTAR PRADESH STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD

Member

Shri. R.R.Shukla

In order to familiarize with the process and structure of PBRs prepared by the BMCs of Uttar Pradesh, I had visited Bahoshi and Manimau BMC in Kannauj District and Narwal BMC in Kanpur Nagar District. These villages were selected in consultation with UP State Biodiversity Board. Dr Somesh and Mr. Kanhaiya from UP SBB accompanied me during the visit. At the site, the Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Range Officer and staff of the Forest Department, Gram Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Adhikari and few villagers were present.

As per the information provided by the officials, UP has prepared 59407 PBRs. Before the Orders of the Hon'ble NGT, 99 PBRs were prepared and the balance were prepared since then on a fast track basis. Villages Manimau and Narwal had prepared PBR on a fast track basis.

Detailed PBRs were seen prepared by TSG employing Retired Agriculture Scientists and are signed by local DFO and subsequently presented to BMCs and signed by Gram Pradhan. Detailed PBR was available in the office of DFO but Gram Vikas Adhikari at Narwal was not aware of his detailed PBR and has prepared a fast track PBR.

Fast Track PBRs are signed by Gram Pradhan and Gram Panchayat Adhikari. At present, the responsibility of preparing PBRs has shifted to Gram Sabha, however there is no institutional memory. Gram Pradhan and Gram Panchayat Secretary(Gram Panchayat Adhikari) have been designated as Ex-Officio Chairman and Secretary of BMC. Panchayat Committee 'Niyojan and Vikas Samiti' has been renamed as 'Jaiv Vividhita Prabhandan,Niyojan and Vikas Samiti'. Members of this Committee will be the members of BMC. For fast track PBRs UP has divided their entire land into 9 Agro Climatic Zones. They have mapped the Bio Diversity for these zones and uploaded on their websites. Detailed formats are also uploaded for local officers to download and fill the blanks for the preparation of local PBRs.

(R.R.Shukla)

APPRAISAL OF PBR PREPARED BY TAMIL NADU STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD

Members

1. Dr. V. G. Malathi

2. Dr. D. Narasimhan

In order to familiarize with the process and structure of PBRs prepared by various BMCs of Tamil Nadu, the PBR members, Dr. V. G. Malathi and Dr. D. Narasimhan, visited the Tamil Nadu SBB office in the forenoon of 23rd February, 2020. The members met the honourable secretary of SBB, Dr. T. V. Manjunatha, who introduced other TSG members of SBB such as Dr. Jayshree Venkatesan, Dr. V. Arivudainambi and Dr. C. Manjula.

After welcoming the members, the secretary described the process of BMCs formation, He explained how the Board was formed in 2009, state rules regarding governance of biodiversity got finalized only in 2019. The designate nodal officer in each Panchayat union were constituent member of BMC. There was delay in formulation of some BMCs due to reorganisation of some of the panchayats. Totally at present there are 13610 BMCs out of which 13604 BMCs have been formed. There are about 385 blocks and 664 village level Panchayats. About 1049 PBR have been prepared from which a total of 190 PBRs seem to have been validated and authenticated by the BMC members. TNSBB also organised training to BMC members for collection of data, maintenance of records and account keeping. Dr. Jayshree Venkatesan gave a brief power point presentation on the importance of PBR, modus operandi for preparation PBRs, and how they can be improved. From the discussion it was evident that SBB TSG members played a proactive role in the preparation of PBRs. It appears that by consulting various line department a basic framework has been prepared by the SBB which was very much discussed by inviting authorities from departments like, agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, water works, land use, environment, SHG members, farm producer group, panchayat officers, civil society and knowledge holders. In parallel, Technical Support group were organized. TNSBB had organized the process of PBR preparation in four steps. First, orientation and capacity building on the preparation of PBR was accomplished. Second, in combination all the departments and directorates were consulted. Third data were collected, collated, assembled and responsibilities were assigned. Last random reviews were done for Data validation. The process involved presentation of the data assembled by the research assistants in SBB with the departments in minimum of six meetings which was discussed thoroughly and a draft was prepared. For every panchayat union volunteers have also been deputed to physically prepare the inventories of flora, fauna and traditional knowledge.

After this initial interaction we were provided with two PBRs, one for Devakottai block in Sivaganga district and Yercaud block in Salem district. The PBR of both the district gave the details of area covered, area under agriculture, various water bodies and various species of lifeforms etc. The SBB members informed that in some of the reports BMC members have added more data on the number of trees and water bodies present thereby thoroughly checking the report prepared.

The PBR review committee after the scrutiny of the report felt that the quality of the report can be improved by including photographs, maps and quantitative data which would help in assessing the status of the biodiversity.

(Dr. V. G. Malathi)

(Dr. D. Narasimhan)

BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, DELHI (OA No. 347/2016) INTERIM REPORT … ·...

Documents

Transcript of BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, DELHI (OA No. 347/2016) INTERIM REPORT … ·...